Wait for Human

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description discloses that the tool blocks until user clicks 'Done' and returns success on resolution. No annotations provided, so description carries the burden; it adequately explains the blocking and completion behavior without contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, each earning their place: first states the action, second explains when to use, third explains blocking behavior and return. Front-loaded with the main purpose. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with no output schema, the description covers the return value, blocking behavior, and parameter meanings (via examples). It gives sufficient context for correct invocation and expectation management.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% (both parameters described). Description adds value by giving examples for the 'reason' parameter, explaining its purpose beyond the schema. It provides context but no additional syntax.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool pauses and requests human intervention by showing an overlay. It lists specific use cases (CAPTCHA, login wall, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings as the only human-interaction tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when to use (CAPTCHA, login wall, any human action). Implicitly through blocking behavior, it's clear it's for blocking situations. Could add what not to use it for, but given its specificity, it's well-guided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.